Coal Makes Us Sick. Oil Makes Us Sick. »
Posted by: jimdoze 1 month, 4 weeks ago120 Comments Report this Story
Joe Biden: "The high price of oil is a gift to the American People." Here's what Harry Reid says. Dems' mission: Radical restructuring of the U.S. economy to remove hydrocarbons from the energy mix. Could they have stated the mission any more succinctly? Will the Dems go nuclear or are they intent on bringing us to our knees and lower
Read Full Story at youtube.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 120
-
birddog54Comment removed: User banned.10 Replies
-
0%
Klarissa1 month, 4 weeks ago
This is really ironic. The Jeffrey Sach's Millennium plan is to tax the gasoline to raise the 0.7% of the GROSS GVP to pay the UN to send it to people who earn only $1.00 a day. Unfortunately the US people hardest hit will be the poor, who will be taxed like everyone else.
The less gasoline, the higher the tax (think cigarettes)
Reply-
0%
nostalgia1 month, 4 weeks ago
The Global Poverty Act of 2007 (S.2433) is coming up for a Senate vote sometime after the July 4 recess, according the office of Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison. Once Harry Reid and the Democrat leadership put it on the calendar, we could have as little as a week to prepare for the vote.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/06/oba...
The bill already passed in the House
Senator Obama's website regarding the bill
http://obama.senate.gov/press/080213-obama_hage...
Reply
-
-
0%
Klarissa1 month, 4 weeks ago
October 16, 2006 -- SENATE Minority Leader Harry Reid's ethics woes continue to mount. An Associated Press expose shows that Reid pushed through changes in federal law that helped the senator get rich - via complex land deals with a lobbyist who's also tied up in a federal bribery case.
Reid has now told the Senate Ethics Committee that he'll amend his past disclosure statements to for the first time cover the business relationships that AP has exposed. But he calls the amendment "technical" - which suggests it won't explain why his original "disclosures" misled the public on the nature of a partnership that made him a $700,000 windfall.
Reply-
0%
Klarissa1 month, 4 weeks ago
. . . Back in August, the Los Angeles Times exposed Reid's questionable involvement and compensation in another Nevada real-estate deal. Harvey Whittemore, a lobbyist and real-estate investor, had plied Reid with campaign contributions and employed Reid's family members. The senator, in turn, helped Whittemore bulldoze through a host of environmental regulations in developing a huge parcel outside Las Vegas, to profit in the tens of millions.
What Reid failed to disclose was his 2001 transfer of ownership of two parcels of land to Patrick Lane LLC - an entity in which he was partnered with one Jay Brown.
AP notes that Brown is a lobbyist, with reported links to organized crime. And he figures prominently in a federal criminal case - which concerns the bribery of members of the Clark County (Nev.) Zoning Commission by developers seeking changes to permit retail development on land they owned, vastly increasing its value.
Reply-
0%
Klarissa1 month, 4 weeks ago
As it happens, in 2001, the Clark County (Nev.) Zoning Commission approved a zoning change that allowed commercial/retail development on the land that Reid owned with Brown.
Then, the next year, Reid introduced and pushed into law the Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002. The senator heralded this as vital in protecting the environment near Las Vegas. In fact, however, the law forced the Department of the Interior to sell off 18,000 acres of land around Las Vegas, spurring development and boosting the value of real-estate investments in the region. (Not what anyone normally associates with "protecting the environment.")
Reply
-
-
-
0%
BB641 month, 4 weeks ago
You know all of the boneheads in DC with the can't drill here mentality, here's an simple solution, build plants that convert coal to gasoline. It's been done in South Africa, China, India and Germany for years. The technology is currently available and much of our current refineries would still be used. Keeping it simple, you convert the coal to a slurry and then refine it just like crude oil. It can be done for under $45.00/barrel. You wouldn't have to beg congress for drilling rights. It would be done with 100% US workers, the equipment would be about 85% American made and best of all, the profits would remain in the United States along with the taxes. But I guess this is way to simple for Harry and Nancy to understand. No special interests, other than the American people. No kick backs, I mean election funds from the Sierra club or the like.
Reply-
0%
cowboygrandpa1 month, 4 weeks ago
BB64:
If that can be done. There are enough small investors in America that would back it. Big oil would try thru their political clout to destroy any chance of it.
You have to remember Bush and Cheney are tied to oil and would not like that to happen as well.
Sounds like a great idea to me.
Reply-
0%
BB641 month, 4 weeks ago
I work in the designing and building of power plants, nuclear & fossils. We've run into a brick wall with DC, primarily the DNC. I'm from Wisconsin, we have Senators Foolsgold and Herbie Kohl who is nobody's senator. Both have ditched meetings sponsored by businesses in Wisconsin when this came up.
As to the oil industry, most have been receptive since my firm still holds several of the patents they currently use for refining crude oil. Our firm developed this in the early 1930's for coal. In testing, we found it was even more effective on crude oil and licensed this to Standard and a number of larger organization. We've build dozens of plants over the years and currently have 9 under construction in China. In the USA, we're delayed every time guys from Green Peace, Sierra Club and the like. With the red tape and power Washington gives to special interests, it's no wonder we've chosen other countries to build plants in.
Reply
-
-
0%
rimbaud1 month, 4 weeks ago
The days are gone when we could lay claim to 60% of the world's resources. Those once underdeveloped countries now need it for themselves. Of course, they could look to us for future technologies, if we were motivated to develop them. While a lot of the world is spending its money on the infrastructure for its future, even in these economically uncertain times, our focus is more short-sighted and our vision is of a world that no longer exists. Our infrastructure is crumbling.
Reply -
0%
bigurn1 month, 4 weeks ago
A truly startling post. At what point are we not simply politicizing the problem, and our politicians becoming negligent in their duties? I have to ask "is it really that simple"?
I'll research it. If it's really that simple, we all owe it to our future to find out why this is not being talked about more strongly.
Reply -
0%
Aidenag1 month, 4 weeks ago
Converting Coal to Gas requires using a ton of energy to do BB64, That is the one drawback to it. it is the same problem facing the use of oil sands, which require 2 barrels of natural gas use to convert oil sands into 1 barrel of usable oil. We would be wasting energy in doing so. Also burning coal created gas releases 2x as much C02 as the stuff we use now does... So in short, its a step backwards in regards to pollution.
Reply-
0%
chevydog1 month, 4 weeks ago
Aiden -- What you're basically saying is that no industrial process is 100% efficient. That's true, but I would submit irrevelant. The value of an energy source is as much in its form as it in the BTU it has. You can't run cars on coal. You have to convert it to a liquid form (with accompanying inefficiency) or (even more inefficiently) to electric.
Also, though there are people who fervently believe this, I would not classify CO2 as a pollutant. It's a natural by-product of many processes. I for one am not at a stage to consider one of the great advances of civilization (discovery of fire) as a neg. Believe that the people who do are doing us all a great disservice.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
Wolfie20071 month, 4 weeks ago
Cowgrandpa
Prove that Bush and Cheney are tied to oil. You can't. Actually, oil companies are doing investing big time in alternative fuels including coal.
You know the things you say and the way you say them makes me want to know, are you or have you ever been a politician?
Reply-
0%
cowboygrandpa1 month, 4 weeks ago
Wolfie:
Not even going to go into that. If you are so blind that you can't see it I suggest you Google Cheney and Bush and see what their wealth has come from.
I don't care that you love the foul pair. Just don't deny what is fact.
It makes your propaganda just funny. Ummm. Halliburton??? Not tied to oil and energy. Bush and the Saudis' not tied to oil.
Please you're really stretching the limit of believability.
But hey spin on Wolfie. Hmmmmmmmm? Are you related to them in some way? LOL
Reply-
0%
Wolfie20071 month, 4 weeks ago
cowgrandpa
No, I'm not wasting my time goggling anything, it's your big mouth that's running, so put up or shut up. It's not about my propaganda, this is about yours. I won't accept crap like you just posted just because Cheney worked for Haliburton or the Bush family knows the Saudis. I want you to prove that Cheney and Bush made their money in oil and I mean directly connected to oil companies.
You spin on Propeller everyday so it's time to prove some of it.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
cowboygrandpa1 month, 4 weeks ago
mcarpentry:
Hahahahahahaaa hahaa.
You just validated one of my points. Everything is fine if you don't pick on the party you favor. Of course being a Bush backer you wouldn't like it.
See partisan politics at work. That is why we don't get this nation fixed.
My point is that none of the politicians favor us.
But people back them to the point of hatred for those who oppose their choice.
Who does that help? The politicians and their backers in both parties. They have succeeded in driving a wedge between Americans. They are using it to widen the gap and will try to destroy us with it.
Energy, finance, religion, ethnicity, politics, education... They are trying and succeeding in turning us against each other when we should be uniting against them.
To bring this country back in line and make it great again. Not their values our values.
Reply-
0%
icono11 month, 4 weeks ago
True. "They are trying and succeeding in turning us against each other when we should be uniting against them."
As long as 'We The People' are at each others throats over what amounts to divisive crumbs of gossip and often delusional opinions then we are not paying attention to what is going on in DC and how things are now 'getting done' in the DC political/financial arena at our expense.
Also true is that our politicians, from the bottom to the top, do not favor us they favor themselves. That can loosley be transplanted into; we pay them a large salary so they can control the laws and therefore the markets and make a huge financial profit for themselves not us.
Reply
-
-
baddad59Comment removed: User banned.
-
-
0%
Wolfie20071 month, 4 weeks ago
Has anyone beside me had any problems editing remarks? I had to edit the last four times before the edit appeared in the post.
Reply -
0%
canadianrancher571 month, 4 weeks ago
I am having a real problem with any of the liberal ideas regarding energy and alternate fuels and I'm not even going to get into carbon credits. Up here we are going through the same nonsense, the federal liberal leader says he wants a new tax on heating oil and also on electricity I guess someone forgot to tell him that in my provice we use hydro electric power which is enviromentally friendly in my eyes. There has to be a change away from fossil fuels but I hope we don't get any more crazy Ideas like the ethanol one.
Alot of these politicians are like little kids in a classroom jumping up and down yelling they know the answer when most of them don't have a clue.
Reply-
-
0%
Spinward1 month, 3 weeks ago
Yep. Environmentalist opposition to dam building is pretty fierce.
Remember, to be "Green" we must oppose:
Off-Shore Drilling, Nuclear Power, Dam Construction, Refinery Building, Arctic Drilling, Coal Mining, or Drilling on Public Land.
Only solar and wind are acceptable, but only the rich can afford those, and we are DEFINITELY against the rich.
I would build a fire to keep warm, but the environmentalists are against me doing that as well.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
aniokly1 month, 4 weeks ago
The Democrats ran for office in 06 promising to do something about gas prices. They did, they doubled them. Remember in the 90s how many times they complained we needed to pay higher prices for gas like those lovely Europeans do. They don't want lower prices on gas. They want you in a littly bitty car, and they don't want you to be running around all over. Democrats have no plan to ever lower your gas prices, not ever. Don't you remember Obama saying we cnnot drive our SUVS, eat as much as we want, turn those thermostats down to 72 and have the Europeans say that is O K? If you want anything done about gas prices vote Democrats out in November.
Reply-
0%
chevydog1 month, 4 weeks ago
I would say that nobody in the past 25 or so years has paid any serious attention to energy policy.
But we've certainly spent alot of time talking about it. I can remember in the early 1970's reading in the Wall Street Journal that when gas (which was then ~42c/gal) reached the European level of 65c/gal that all would be well. Well, the equivalent has now happened; and is all well?
Seems like we all have things we'd rather do--point fingers at the other guy, recreate the world in a certain image, or keep government out of a situation which IMHO is a national security one. I am no "green" fanatic, which I feel is more for show than anything; but I do practice personal and household conservation. Still I see a situation slipping away.
It seems like maybe we've become so divided that even to hint that someone else has something to contribute is rank heresy. Really pitiful.
Reply
-
0%
calitennflo1 month, 4 weeks ago
Magnetic radiation too makes us sick, overstimulates the neural ... over uses the brain stem, where the minute gaps that allow a spark, alpha, beta, and theta brain waves...plus another....and if you raise the bandwidth...there may be times we are with others....
Sad...even the glandular activety is excited...overstimulated and the amounts of chemicals that t
